Back
2012 Supreme(J&K) 585
JAMMU & KASHMIR HIGH COURT
Muzaffar Hussain Attar, J.
Ghulam Mohammad Kuchai & Ors. -Appellant
Versus
State of J&K & Ors. -Resopndent
OWP No. 410/2012
Decided On : 31-10-2012
Mr. M. Ayoub Bhat for the Petitioner(s).
Mr. N.H. Shah, Dy.AG for 1 to 3, Mr. Javaid Iqbal for R-4, Mr. S.N. Ratanpuri for R-5 to 12.
The apportionment of compensation and ownership rights in land acquisition disputes should be settled by the civil court under Section 31 of the J&K Land Acquisition Act, with a focus on saving public money and ensuring proper determination of the amount due to the parties involved.
Headnote:
Land Acquisition Dispute - J&K Land Acquisition Act - Section 18/31 - 66 kanals-01 marla of land belonging to the petitioners was acquired for setting up of the 'Group Centre at Lethpora.' The controversy arose due to the apportionment of compensation and ownership rights over the acquired land. The Collector made a reference to the District Judge under Section 18 of the J&K Land Acquisition Act. The issue of apportionment of compensation is to be settled by the civil court under Section 31 of the said Act.
Fact of the Case:
The dispute arose from the acquisition of land for a 'Group Centre at Lethpora.' The petitioners sought to withdraw the compensation amount credited to their accounts, but the Collector and the Bank were directed not to disburse the amount due to a dispute over ownership and apportionment of the acquired land. The matter was referred to the District Judge under Section 18 of the J&K Land Acquisition Act.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the ownership and apportionment of the acquired land were in dispute, and the issue was referred to the civil court under Section 31 of the J&K Land Acquisition Act. The court dismissed the petition, stating that the public money involved in the compensation should be saved, and the Collector's actions did not infringe the legal rights of the petitioners.
Issues: The key issues revolved around the apportionment of compensation and ownership rights over the acquired land, leading to a dispute between the petitioners, the Collector, and the Bank. The court also considered the implications of the earlier writ petition and the interim orders passed in the case.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the dispute over ownership and apportionment of compensation should be settled by the civil court under Section 31 of the J&K Land Acquisition Act. It emphasized the need to save public money and stated that interim orders merge into the final judgment of the court.
Final Decision: The petition was held to be meritless and dismissed, along with all connected CMPs.
Certiorari/Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent Collector Land Acquisition/Assistant Commissioner (R) Pulwama regarding issu#31;ance of direction to the authorities of "The J&K Bank Ltd. Branch Lethpora Distt. Pulwama not to allow the petitioners to withdraw the amount as being illegal, unconstitutional and without any authority and the respon#31;dents including the respondent Branch Manager, the J&K Bank Ltd. Branch Lethpora, Distt., Pulwama be commanded not to cause any hurdles/inter#31;ference into the withdrawal of the amount credited in their Account Nos. 4331 and 4244 SB on the basis of award amount as per the final award and apportionment statement enclosed with the award and the petitioners be given the amount forthwith alongwith interest.
2. The reply affidavit has been filed by the official respondents as also by the impleaded parties.
3. The controversy projected into this writ petition owes its genesis to the acquisition of the land for which final award has been passed on 14.12.2011. The petitioners during the pendency of the writ petition filed supplementary affidavit, wherein, they have brought to the notice of the Court communication of the Collector Land Acquisition, Pulwama addressed to the Treasury Officer, Pulwama dated 23.12.2011 in which the said authority has been asked to stop the payment of land compensation which was released in favour of the petitioners. Similarly, another communication has been send to the respondent-Bank not to disburse the amount in favour of the petitioners. The stand taken by the official respondents in their reply affidavit in para 5 to 8 is taken note of:
5-8/- In reply to paras 5 to 8 of the writ petition, it is submitted that as per the apportionment statement, 66 kanals-01 marla of land belonging to the petitioners was acquired for setting up of the "Group Centre at Lethpora." Accordingly, 80% of compensation was paid to the petitioners. Thereafter, an amount of 20% was released in their favour and credited to their accounts at J&K Bank Branch Lethpora. However, in the meantime, an application was moved by one Mst. Misra Begum Wd/o Khair Mohamad and others whereunder they held that the record prepared during the acquisition proceedings by the revenue field agency was in contradiction with the spot position and because of this the applicants were put to wrongful loss. While taking cognizance of the application, a report was sought from Tehsildar Pampore, submitted vide No. TP-OQ/779 dated 07.03.2012, which reveals that as per the revised records prepared after the settlement, the petitioners have ownership rights over 75 kanals-18 marlas of land out of which, only 53 kanals-04 = marlas were acquired. Consequently, the officials of J&K Bank Branch Lethpora were asked to stop the release of payment in favour of the petitioners and their accounts were freezed.
4. It is pertinent to mention here that dispute had arisen between the parties with respect to the title/apportionment, thereby in order to settle the same and determine the rights of the parties involved, a reference was made to District Judge, Pulwama u/s 18 of J&K Land Acquisition Act vide Office No. 01/DCP/HA/GC dated 05.04.2012 and is presently under adjudication there.
5. Similarly stand taken by the impleaded parties in para 3 of the reply affidavit is taken note of:
"3. That the controversy dates back to the year 2005 when the land of the petitioners and the answering respondents was sought to be acquired by the State Government. It is submitted that the State respondent had wrongly accessed and paid the compensation of the land belonging to the answering respondents to the petitioners herein. It is submitted that the said action of the respondents was challenged by the answering respon#31;dents by virtue of a writ petition bearing OWP No. 445/2008 titled Misra Begum v. State & Ors. While disposing of the writ petition the Hon'ble Court by virtue of its orde
